D&D 5E Variant Fighter has anyone tried it?

[Garthanos]

It really looks clean has versatility I really like.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/bdode0/variant_fighter_reupload_vdp_version/

direct to the pdf

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NyxMJwNHAAgAO5wPFL3BAXKEjTnBfjKs/view

Makes maneuvers a concept for all fighters

 

[Quartz]

Rather obviates the Battlemaster, doesn't it?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Steps too much on the Battlemaster IMO. But if you want some options for all Fighters, here is something our table uses:

Attack Maneuver: choose one of the following maneuvers to learn at 3rd level. You can attempt the maneuver when you hit with an attack by using your bonus action. You learn an additional maneuver at 10th and 16th levels in this class.

Disarm: when you hit with a weapon attack, you can attempt to disarm your target. The target must make a Strength saving throw against a DC equal to 8 + your attack modifier. If the target's weapon has the Heavy property, they have advantage on the Strength saving throw. If the target's weapon has the Light property, they have disadvantage on the Strength saving throw.

Stun: when you hit with a weapon attack, you can attempt to stun your target. The target must make a Constitution saving thrown against a DC equal to 8 + your attack modifier. If it fails the save, it is stunned until the start of its next turn.

Trip: when you hit with a weapon attack, you can attempt to knock your target down. The target must make a Dexterity saving throw against a DC equal to 8 + your attack modifier. If it fails the save, the target falls prone.

 

[Garthanos]

Steps too much on the Battlemaster IMO. .

It is the battlemaster and not meant to be alongside, and with at-will options.

 

[Garthanos]

Rather obviates the Battlemaster, doesn't it?

Replaces it is the word and has at-will options. Gives other fighter archetypes some maneuvers geared for them.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think the point of this was to replace the Battlemaster entirely. And from the looks of things is meant to replace the Ranger and Paladin too (and even parts of the Barbarian). It looks to me to be a Fighter that uses combat superiority for all subclasses (which I personally think should have happened from the get-go) and turns most of the martial classes into Fighter subclasses.

Which, if you are looking to go with strictly a Core Four type of game... it isn't a bad idea necessarily. This variant allows players to have a ranger-esque Fighter, a paladin-esque Fighter, a warlord-esque Fighter, and a large raced barbarian-esque Fighter (in addition to a new type of Arcane Archer, and a Champion that gets maneuvers.)

This variant should not be used alongside the current Fighter, but should be an entire replacement for the Fighter section of the PHB. If you do that... its an interesting type of change. Not necessarily balanced (I didn't bother going through all the individual maneuvers for each subclass or their superiority options), but interesting nonetheless.

 

[Eubani]

The fighter should of been 2 classes. A simple fighter with mainly passive abilities and a more advanced fighter full of choices and resource management. The Battlemaster whilst functional does not scratch the itch for all of us. I believe that having the basic fighter and the "advanced" one share the same chasis made too many compromises.

 

[Garthanos]

Steps too much on the Battlemaster IMO. But if you want some options for all Fighters, here is something our table uses:

I think a champion might like things flavored more for their own style.



than to just have generic tidbits

 

[Garthanos]

The tactician also has more Warlord going on.

 

[Garthanos]

The duelist looks interesting as well.